On 1/02/2012 cogsy wrote:>So has Ross quit, or is he just taking a "family break".... I wasn't sure>from the editorial?

Quit and started his own business as far as I'm aware.

>Maybe there's not enough money to employ a climber to edit Rock?

I think its probably incredibly hard to find someone within our very small climbing community who wants to take on something like this full-time as a career (+ do Wild). Problem is now there isn't a junior that has been trained up to fill the role - something Ross did at Rock/Wild for a few years before he got the full editors gig.

Surely, if Chockstone has taught us anything it is that most climbers can't spell, punctuate, string together coherent thoughts, and have only a rudimentary understanding of grammar. Whilst this is fine for an interweb forum I suspect it is not the skill set needed to edit a climbing magazine.

On 1/02/2012 nmonteith wrote:>On 1/02/2012 cogsy wrote:>>So has Ross quit, or is he just taking a "family break".... I wasn't>sure>>from the editorial?>>Quit and started his own business as far as I'm aware.>

Such a shame.... he really was a good editor. I have really enjoyed the last couple of years of rock magazines since he was sole editor.
On another note.. I really like the British "Climb" magazine.... I wonder if they'll do a bit of Australian stuff in the future?

On 1/02/2012 nmonteith wrote:>On 1/02/2012 cogsy wrote:>>So has Ross quit, or is he just taking a "family break".... I wasn't>sure>>from the editorial?>>Quit and started his own business as far as I'm aware.>>>Maybe there's not enough money to employ a climber to edit Rock?>>I think its probably incredibly hard to find someone within our very small>climbing community who wants to take on something like this full-time as>a career (+ do Wild). Problem is now there isn't a junior that has been>trained up to fill the role - something Ross did at Rock/Wild for a few>years before he got the full editors gig.

On 3/02/2012 Danger Mouse wrote:>On 1/02/2012 nmonteith wrote:>>On 1/02/2012 cogsy wrote:>>>So has Ross quit, or is he just taking a "family break".... I wasn't>>sure>>>from the editorial?>>>>Quit and started his own business as far as I'm aware.>>>>>Maybe there's not enough money to employ a climber to edit Rock?>>>>I think its probably incredibly hard to find someone within our very>small>>climbing community who wants to take on something like this full-time>as>>a career (+ do Wild). Problem is now there isn't a junior that has been>>trained up to fill the role - something Ross did at Rock/Wild for a few>>years before he got the full editors gig.>>One of many problems...>>The closest thing there was to a junior also quit. :)

Hmm. I have made the connection that this is an informed post. ~> So where is Rock heading in your opinion?

No captions on all the photos in Bob McMahon's article - a total balls up - Bob is not only fuming about that, but also the way the article was edited - tenses changed, paragraphs changed positions, potentially politically incorrect statements removed or changed, sections left out completely. The editor should consult with the author prior to publication about proposed changes to the article. If someone goes to the trouble of spending hours composing an article they should be given the courtesy of seeing the edited version and giving the ok for it to be printed.

On 6/02/2012 Tastrad wrote:>No captions on all the photos in Bob McMahon's article - a total balls>up - Bob is not only fuming about that, but also the way the article was>edited - tenses changed, paragraphs changed positions, potentially politically>incorrect statements removed or changed, sections left out completely.>The editor should consult with the author prior to publication about proposed>changes to the article. If someone goes to the trouble of spending hours>composing an article they should be given the courtesy of seeing the edited>version and giving the ok for it to be printed.

From what Ive heard thats been the standard for rock editing for years....

On 6/02/2012 rodw wrote:>On 6/02/2012 Tastrad wrote:>>No captions on all the photos in Bob McMahon's article - a total balls>>up - Bob is not only fuming about that, but also the way the article>was>>edited - tenses changed, paragraphs changed positions, potentially politically>>incorrect statements removed or changed, sections left out completely.>>The editor should consult with the author prior to publication about>proposed>>changes to the article. If someone goes to the trouble of spending hours>>composing an article they should be given the courtesy of seeing the>edited>>version and giving the ok for it to be printed.>>From what Ive heard thats been the standard for rock editing for years....

From what Bob told me yesterday, this is much worse than he's experienced before.
As Gerry said above, the removal of potentially politically incorrect statements - e.g. even touching on issues like physical handicaps - is something entirely new. To not even run such significant changes by the author is not good editorship. It looks like the newbie is trying to put his own stamp on Rock but the way he is going about things he is likely to sink Rock without a trace.

On 7/02/2012 Danger Mouse wrote:>On 6/02/2012 tastybigmac wrote:>>I too am waiting with baited breath to see the next issue. It will be>interesting>>to see what they can produce on their own.>>Do you mean "bated breath"?

Publisher of Rock magazine here.
I would welcome the opportunity to answer a few of your queries.

Ross resigned to spend more time with his wife and new baby, he will still be doing freelance writing.
Our new editor is not a climber but he is a top class journo who understands he has big shoes to fill. Dont be too quick to judge, he turned this first mag on tight deadlines and no handover. Judge him in 6 months time if you must and give credit for improvements as well as critique.
The new editor has met Simon Carter a couple of weeks before this edition, not sure why cogsy would think otherwise, misunderstanding.

We are working hard to continue a 30 years of climbing magazine heritage in the most demanding publishing climate yet seen. We have dedicated more resources ensuring higher production values, better photography and more contributors. We are striving to grow readership and continue to grow the sport of climbing and introduce more people to the pursuit whilst respecting the heritage and hardcore following.

I received a personal email today from forum member Rod Smith who understand better than most as to what is involved in producing a quality magazine. I appreciated his direct criticism and feedback and take much of what he said on board. It also gave me an opportunity to clear up some misunderstandings as well as explaining our side of things. We welcome more feedback and suggestions, you can find our editors email details in the magazine.
Thanks
Rock publisher

>>From what Bob told me yesterday, this is much worse than he's experienced>before.>As Gerry said above, the removal of potentially politically incorrect>statements - e.g. even touching on issues like physical handicaps - is>something entirely new. To not even run such significant changes by the>author is not good editorship. It looks like the newbie is trying to put>his own stamp on Rock but the way he is going about things he is likely>to sink Rock without a trace.

I'd be curious to know what he considered to be "potentially politically incorrect statements" - because a lot of people say some pretty offensive stuff which they just claim is politically incorrect or being picked on by the PC police. There is, however, a difference. And there's a time and place. I don't know Bob to have any idea if he knows the difference. And it's possible the editor does know the difference.